Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Some Stores Not Selling the Gay Hallmark Cards

AmericaBlog picked up on this, and since we were just talking about the new Hallmark cards I thought it'd be good to bring up here.

From Nampa, Idaho's, 2News-TV:
NAMPA (AP) - A manager says seven Hallmark greeting card stores in the Treasure Valley will not carry the company's new same-sex marriage cards.

Cassi Jacobsen, an assistant manager for the Jordan's Hallmark store in Nampa's Karcher Mall, says the family that owns the seven area stores has decided against carrying the new line of greeting cards. She said the owners were out of town and not immediately available for comment.

Reaction to the cards has been mixed.

Idaho Family Values Alliance Executive Director Bryan Fischer sent out a press release Thursday calling for local-area Hallmark stores not to carry the cards.

But Delmar Stone of Nampa, executive director of the National Association of Social Workers Idaho Chapter, called the cards "wonderful."

Jody May-Chang, the Boise editor of the gay rights Web site, called the decision a bullying tactic. Treasure Valley Hallmark stores won't carry same sex greeting cards

That's the whole story.

AmericaBlog's John Aravosis seems to want to boycott Hallmark over this. I guess I see his point, but you also kind of want to give the company credit for making cards in the first place for the gay market. I mean, that's a big step forward, now gay people can express their feelings as superficially as everybody else. Well I hope Hallmark will work out a deal with their franchise owners so they put the product on the shelf and take people's money. It sounds to me like a good business tactic, but what do I know?

Ah, I just Googled this nutty guy. It's really the Idaho Values Alliance, not "family" values. They say they're the "Idaho affiliate of the American Family Association." He says:
Realize that if gay activists get their way, and introduce "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" protections into Idaho law, these owners could be sued for discrimination for their conscience-driven decision not to sell pro-gay greeting cards.


Let's make it a "buycott" instead of a boycott, and show our support for local businessmen who are committed to doing the right thing. Be sure to thank the staff for the store's stand when you make your purchase; they will pass on your word of encouragement to the owners. Local Hallmarks will not stock gay marriage cards

Buycott. Actually, that's pretty good, I hadn't heard that one before. Well, I never heard of Nampa, Idaho before, and I don't expect this is going to affect me any. There're probably other things they do in some places that I wouldn't like if I lived there. Eventually the the people of Nampa are going to get over their fear of gay people, that's my prediction, they just might be a little slower than more progressive places in the country, for instance Montgomery County, Maryland.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Eventually the the people of Nampa are going to get over their fear of gay people, that's my prediction"

What do you predict will happen with their fear of other sexual deviants?

August 27, 2008 5:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous, currently starring as Screamin' Charlie strikes again, insulting queer people just as the starting gun fires.

It seems increasingly clear that the AFA et al, have put their thumb in the dike, by 'buycotting' some prejudiced card stores. It seems to me, after their boycotts of disney, McDonalds, and Ford, that the waves are coming over the levee.

America is rapidly becoming more accepting of LGBT people, as we just become part of the background noise of everyday life. Barring some sort of national insanity (cf. Germany in the '20s and '30s), equal rights for queer people will soon be simply a paragraph in our history books.

August 27, 2008 9:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For anyone who has ever owned a private business, the business owners always have a choice for the goods they want to sell.
I believe Hallmark stated that each individual owner could do as they please.

August 27, 2008 11:45 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

"Ah, I just Googled this nutty guy. It's really the Idaho Values Alliance"

Oh he’s crazy [Bryan Fischer]. I Googled him awhile back and he’s got Paul Cameron AND the infamous Dutch Study on his site.

A great big banner at the top saying he didn’t even care about his credibility would have been more effective.

He says:
"Realize that if gay activists get their way, and introduce "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" protections into Idaho law, these [Hallmark] owners could be sued for discrimination for their conscience-driven decision not to sell pro-gay greeting cards."

Doesn’t he know? The cards are now mentally perceptive. You don’t even have to say you’re offended that they sell the cards, the cards will pick up your thoughts, send a message to the gay mafia, and you’ll be arrested on the spot! In front of your children!

At which point your children will taken from you, placed in foster care, and automatically placed with an unmarried gay couple.

Not to mention the fact that your name and picture will appear in the local newspaper, with the caption: “This person thought a bad thought about a gay person.”
In fact, I just recently watched -- and was quite moved by -- a movie on the Hallmark channel the other night, but I had no idea that the entire concept of one person being able to make a difference to make the world a better place was just some propagandistic sham created by the gay agenda!

I’m not only going to boycott Hallmark cards, their channel, but also, good will altogether. Because clearly that’s what those gays want, peace and love in this world.

And as a Christian, I’ll stand for NONE OF IT!

August 28, 2008 1:07 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The most recent poll is out on the attempt to ban equal marriage in California.

The November ballot initiative to ban gay marriage would be soundly defeated if the election were held today, according to a statewide poll released Wednesday.
40% of likely voters support enshrining bigotry in the California constitution while 54% oppose bigotry. Support for bigotry has continued to drop since the California supreme court decision to mandate equal marriage.

August 28, 2008 2:36 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Here's the link to that article:

August 28, 2008 2:40 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...


One wife

One house

One nation

August 28, 2008 3:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Delusions of grandeur

Hope everyone watches the speech tonight

You'll remember back when Obama clinched the nomination he gave a speech about how he's the one the world has been waiting for to save it

Now, tonight, he will give the speech from a reconstructed Temple of Apollo

It's scary

This guy thinks he an object of worship

August 28, 2008 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"40% of likely voters support enshrining bigotry in the California constitution while 54% oppose bigotry. Support for bigotry has continued to drop since the California supreme court decision to mandate equal marriage."

When will they vote on amending the definition of marriage to drop the bigotry against people who want to marry their chihuahuas?

August 28, 2008 3:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who could not be moved at the sight of a major political party naming Barack Obama, an African American, as its presidential candidate? To me, there could not be a better sign that America has left behind its racist past. We are now approaching what may be termed "the end of racism." The End of Racism was the title of my 1995 bestseller, hugely controversial when it was published, but now it seems to have been a decade ahead of its time. If we appreciate the significance of our current moment, we are driven to an ironic but rational conclusion: perhaps the best way to recognize Obama's historic achievement is to vote for John McCain this November.

Consider this: for the past several years we have been hearing liberal Democrats emphasize how racism still defines America, how things haven't really changed all that much, how racism has gone underground and is now more covert and more dangerous than ever. It may seem strange that a racist country would adopt legal policies that discriminate against the majority and in favor of minorities. Even so, liberal activists and civil rights activists continue to browbeat white America in the schools, in the universities, in politics and in the media if there is the slightest dissent from civil rights orthodoxy.

Well, I don't know how many people have been drinking the liberal Kool-Aid, but these people must be utterly shocked at the success of Barack Obama. Here is a guy who could not possibly have made it as far as he has with only black votes. He has attracted not only white votes but the votes of some of the most affluent and successful segments of the white community. Obama, not Hillary, is the pillar of the white establishment. Moreover, Obama's own campaign is based on the premise that America is no longer racist. Far from making race-based appeals, to blacks on the basis of solidarity, and to whites on the basis of guilt, Obama campaigns on the expectation that whites share his economic values and foreign policy positions and view of America. In other words, Obama's public message is that race doesn't matter and that transracial alliances should be built on shared political and cultural values. It's a good message, and how it must dismay professional civil rights activists to hear it. I wouldn't be surprised if Jesse Jackson is telling family members, "If race relations keep improving like this, I may have to get a real job."

Clearly there are many in the liberal Democratic camp who are made profoundly uncomfortable by the recognition that racism is no more a defining feature of American life or even African American life. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that racism does not exist. This is a big country, and surely one can find several examples of it. But racism, which used to be systematic, is now only episodic. In fact, when I ask young blacks on the campus today whether America is racist, many say yes. But if I ask them to give me examples of how that racism affects their lives, they are hard pressed to give a single one. The best they can do is to mention "Rodney King" or provide some well-known, recycled horror story. Recently someone told me that McCain is still winning the white vote by a substantial majority and that shows "we have a long way to go" in overcoming white bigotry. By this logic, blacks are have even longer way to go in overcoming their bigotry since Obama is winning almost 98 percent of the black vote. When your logic leads to an absurd conclusion, go back and re-examine the premise.

Even though Obama's candidacy signals that America is overcoming its racial past, neither Obama nor his wife recognize that. Their personal statements, as seen for example in Obama's books, are suffused with race-consciousness, race-obsession and even racial resentment. The more privileges they have received on the basis of race, the more embittered they seem to become. The source of these pathologies is the very liberalism that the Obamas have embraced: a liberalism that declares them equal while treating them as inferiors who need preferential treatment. (Liberals hate to have this pointed out; hence the irrational invective of the early responses to this post.) The solutions are obvious. If you want to get rid of racial obsession, stop talking and thinking about race so much. If you want to remove race as the basis of decision-making in America, let's eliminate America's policies that make race the basis of decision-making. And if you want a party that stands for color-blindess and equal opportunity, you might consider voting for the Republicans.

August 28, 2008 4:53 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

When Obama's elected it'll be clear the U.S. has overcome its racist past.

August 28, 2008 6:00 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Red baron, you can marry your chihuahua when it gives informed consent.

August 28, 2008 6:05 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

If it was up to me Red Baron I'd let you marry your dog, no human's going to marry you.

August 28, 2008 6:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think our friend Anonymous was quoting Dinesh D'Souza again. Just to think, they can get married in California and Massachusetts now; or maybe it was Loving v. Virginia in 1969 that legalized their liaison.

Then again, we would need a court decision that allowed people to marry who don't actually have names.

At least Chihuahuas have names.


August 28, 2008 6:17 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I watched a debate with Dinesh, he lied through his teeth.

August 28, 2008 6:34 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Guess that was his Islamic-Christian values showing through.

August 28, 2008 6:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The End of Racism was the title of my 1995 bestseller, hugely controversial when it was published, but now it seems to have been a decade ahead of its time.

Distort D'Newza is wrong if he thinks racism is over in this country. Either that or he is blind to the facts:

Per the US Department of Justice" prosecutions for racially charged hate crimes have been increasing since Bush took office.
-From fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2007, the Department of Justice charged nearly 15 percent more defendants with civil rights violations than were charged from fiscal year 1994 through fiscal year 2000.

-From fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2007, the Department of Justice charged 62 defendants in 41 cross-burning cases.

Additionally ...there have been reports from across the country of nooses appearing at schools, work places, and neighborhoods around the country. A noose is powerful symbol of hate and racially motivated violence, and it can constitute the basis of a prosecution under federal criminal civil rights laws in certain circumstances....

-Some recent examples of cases prosecuted by the Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section include:

-Conspiracy to threaten, assault, and murder African-Americans. United States v. Saldana: Four members of a violent Latino street gang in Los Angeles were convicted of participating in a conspiracy aimed at threatening, assaulting, and murdering African-Americans in a neighborhood claimed by the defendants’ gang. Three of the defendants were also charged with, and convicted of, a federal hate crime violation stemming from the murder of an African American who was killed because he was black and because he was using a public street claimed by the gang. All four defendants received life sentences. In recognition of the success in this case, the prosecution team was awarded the Anti-Defamation League’s 2007 Sherwood Prize for Combating Hate and the International Association of Chiefs of Police 2007 Civil Rights Award.

-Racial cross burnings outside homes. United States v. Shroyer and United States v. Youngblood: Individuals in Indianapolis and Detroit, respectively, were successfully prosecuted for burning crosses outside the homes of biracial families with the intent to interfere with victims’ housing rights.

-Racial intimidation of a biracial family. United States v. Fredericy and Kuzlik: Two men were convicted in Cleveland, Ohio, for their roles in pouring mercury, a highly toxic substance, on the front porch and driveway of a bi-racial couple and their young child. This racially-motivated act was done with the intent to force the victims out of their home.

-Assaults by members of national white supremacist organization. United States v. Walker: Three members of the National Alliance, a notorious white supremacist organization, were convicted for assaulting a Mexican-American bartender at his place of employment in Salt Lake City, Utah. These same defendants allegedly assaulted an individual of Native-American heritage outside another bar in Salt Lake City. The Anti-Defamation League praised the Division’s efforts in successfully prosecuting this important hate crimes case.

-Race-based murder of African-American. United States v. Eye and Sandstrom: The defendants in this pending death penalty case in Kansas City, Missouri, have been charged with shooting and killing an African-American man as he walked down the street. The government alleges that the defendants shot the victim because of his race and because he was walking on a public street. Trial is currently set for January 10, 2008. If the defendants are convicted, the Government will seek to have the death penalty imposed against them.

-Cold case against former Klansman for kidnapping and conspiracy in connection with murder of two African-Americans. United States v. Seale: This case stemmed from the 1964 murders of 19-year-old Charles Moore and Henry Dee in Franklin County, Mississippi. In June 2007, former Klansman James Seale, 71, was convicted of kidnapping and conspiracy in connection with the murders of Moore and Dee. The defendant received two life sentences. The Department continues to work with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the National Urban League, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, to identify additional unresolved civil rights era murders.

Here's how Mavis Staples sees it:

...I saw New Orleans
Saw the people left for dead
I've heard every bald-faced lie
You politicians said [heckuva job, Brownie]

I've see it for myself
And you can't fool your sight
Well we'd better make a change
And we'd better start tonight.

With my own eyes
I saw it with my own eyes
My own eyes
So I know it's true..."

August 28, 2008 6:39 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Citizens for Responsible Marriage License Certificates:

"Thousands of studies have shown that children do best when raised in a home with one named parent…and another named parent."

August 28, 2008 6:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

DENVER - A group of suspected drug users arrested in Denver over the weekend with methamphetamine, guns and bulletproof vests made racist threats against Barack Obama but posed no true danger to the presidential candidate, federal authorities said Tuesday.

Obama will be in Denver this week accepting the Democratic nomination.

The three men — all high on methamphetamine when arrested — are the subject of an assassination investigation but so far, authorities say, it appears that they had no capacity to carry out any attack on Obama.

August 29, 2008 7:56 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home